I will agree with this. Better system in 2; better writing in 1.
I agree completely with John_Reynolds.
I think so, too. The nautical structure didn’t click for me that much.
Ditto.
I disliked the writing in 1, so this must be terrible.
The writing is much better in 2. There is a very distinct conveyance of “place” and “culture” through the setting, quest, and character writing.
However, there is a clear problem with the main plot structure.
I agree that PoE1 had better structure, and like @fdsaion I feel like the writing in 2 improved over 1, but the problem with PoE2 is the main plot. It feels way too short, like if you just did it all told you could almost wrap the game up in a single session, or something. If you spend time exploring the world, it’s almost a perfect RPG, but like @ShivaX points out then you have this strange feeling of “shouldn’t I be chasing the giant city-sized statue?” that runs counter to how the game is clearly designed to be experienced.
I also want more massive dungeons - there are a few, but I feel like PoE1 had bigger combat/exploration spaces overall. Not a deal breaker, just a “if I could make a wish” kind of thing.
I only played PoE2 once, and I’m really excited to dive back in at some point here, now the game has been updated with tons more content and QOL improvements. I’ll probably do just that after I wrap RDR 2, I think.
For me, I think their style of writing improved in PoE 2, but a lot of the content wasn’t as good. I think i enjoyed most of the companion stories better in 1. Still, there was a lot of good bits in PoE 2’s writing. I also think PoE 2 was less convoluted. I think I’m biased against all the nautical stuff and it bleeds into my opinion about the rest of the game.
Yeah, expectation for the player to take their time and do side quest stuff while the world is coming to an end bothers me in most RPGs. That was one benefit of Kingmaker’s story. While there are over all goals, it doesn’t feel crazy that you go off and do side quest A because in a way they tend to support your goal of ruling the land and caring for the inhabitants.
Kingmaker does a good job of, “But, we can’t do anything about it right now.”
It spans literally years, whereas PoE2’s main story realistically is a month or two tops.
Kingmaker also doesn’t wait for you, which is a plus in a lot of ways, a negative because of how they implemented a lot of the Kingdom stuff (ie once someone starts something they can’t EVER stop, which is dumb).
Which in a lot of ways leads into another problem that PoE2 has in that you can rest after every fight and there is never a downside to it. Since time doesn’t matter if you spend 2 weeks on some random island fighting ogres, the world doesn’t care.
POE 2 was less convoluted, but, I just couldn’t figure out why I was helping out all of these factions. Once your characters have their knowledge from POE 1, why does any of the politics and such matter at all to them in 2?
In the beginning I don’t think we have reasons, but I think it is then assumed you need at least one faction to have your back when taking the end journey across the sea.
I didn’t really want to help any, but the island people seemed like the best choice for me. Wasn’t the choice bad pirates, not as bad pirates, and island nation?
All of whom just wanted you to kill things and/or deliver things for them. That’s why I think I can get behind the idea that the style of writing is better and the world maybe better realized, but I don’t really see much in the way a main story that makes sense.
Not quite. The choice is 1) the native Huana - your caste system is dodgy as fuck but eh, first do no harm, 2) The Valian Republics - soft colonization by capitalist exploitation and resource extraction, 3) The Royal Deadfire Company - colonization by gunpowder the way the British used to do it 4) The Principii - an actual goddamn pirate nation - founded by ousted aristocrats to boot.
Or 5) fuck it, I have the money to pimp my ride and crew to make the journey without support.
I’d agree with the criticism of the main plot being too slight. The final journey across Ondra’s Mortar is supposed to be a gate that forces you to engage with the b-plot of Deadfire politics, but the investigation in the first game is a more compelling structure, because when you hit that final barrier, you’re likely to have met the requirements anyway, so it feels like a shrug.
I still like Deadfire more though, partly because simple mechanical improvements, partly because I find the b-plot pretty damn interesting, partly because of the way your party interacts with each other, partly because the overland map navigation mimics the severly underrated Storm of Zehir, partly because it’s less dour.
And your crew sings sea shanties when their morale is high:
Ah that’s right. Thanks for the reminder.
One new additional subclass per class! Just when I think I’m out, they pull me back in </Pacino mode>
Been waiting for this update on the new DLC and patch. I even started another game to move it along a bit before it hits just so I can go into the DLC sooner rather than later since I knew it was end-game content. Excited to have this coming along, although it’s hitting at a point when I have the least amount of free time to spend gaming. Arg!
One thing I wish they’d do is just drop the level cap. XP seems to be fairly limited (i.e. once you complete quests and kill what you can kill) so it’s not that you have an endless supply, and there are plenty of ways to continue to improve your character/party beyond the current cap. I really dislike the lack of advancement in the late game, takes the fun out of it and makes me more eager to just finish up and start fresh.
You know a couple of years ago I made a pitch for the fact that games don’t really settle into their correct or final state until at least a year of patches and dlc. I was roundly criticized for that “shrieking” – There are good reasons to play a new release as rough as a diamond as it might be (like Fallout '76 which I am terribly tempted to run into).
But I thing a slight reiteration of my original off-criticized (here at least) point is: Good holy god games on release suck – it takes months for them to percolate to something resembling palatability --and the dlc chase just continues ad infinitum.
Pillars 2 is a weird example: I don’t recall it being buggy at the start. But good god these patches and dlcs --when do you decide to say --“Ok this game is finished --let’s play it”
Do you play from the beginning to end at the start? Sure if it works -then there isn’t just dlc but there are huge game changing patches.
– Take Pathfinder:Kingmaker – a living example of my thesis. And I was a backer of that game.
I am a soft touch for what I think I like to play. But man – we get burned LOt
Pillars was solid at launch, but Obsidian has added a lot of QoL changes, even additions, to the game.
There is no correct answer on the topic. Some games at launch will feel complete and be fairly bug-free, offering a good bang for paying full price. Others not so much. Gamers can make guesses based on the track records of particular pubs and devs, but there’s no guarantee there either.
Pillars and Odyssey are the only two games I’ve pre-purchased this year and that is part of a long trend on my part. Not sure if it’s age, an increasing frugality on my part with teenage kids to now support, or just a decline is new releases I just have to have day one.
To be fair (and Ty John) I played pillars a bunch at launch and never had any problems. Odyssey is so large a game I am not sure DLC really dent into it’s overall play. I am about level 32 in odyssey and I wouldn’t imagine a dlc being something I could run into atm.
Setting aside those two examples for a minute – Red Dead Redemption 2 was aa console only release. And my bet it was complete on release (or almost so).
I think it is now axiomatic that PC releases will start buggyish, incomplete, and filled with potential dlc’s. And I will dutifully suck it up and by games at launch and then wait for a year (or two) and wait for it to be the “Final” product.
I feel like I am 'shrieking" again but I will say in Pillars 2 defense I enjoyed that game at launch and saw no reason that it could not be finished as it was. And my experience with the dlc hasn’t lead me to believe the game got better, except for patches and QOL improvements.
I pretty much agree with this. The release of a game has become a way to continue funding the project to get all the planned content into it. Even though I backed it, I’ve only sparingly played POE 2; I’m not really hunkering down into it until all the DLCs are released. I just don’t have time to play a 50-80 hour game twice (or more) just to experience all the DLC released a year later.